Case alleging Apple has monopoly over the App Store dismissed on procedural grounds

In 2011, a group of attorneys filed a bizarre lawsuit against Apple alleging that Apple holds a monopoly over the App Store to the extent any one who wants to purchase an iOS app must go through Apple's App Store. Consequently, the lawsuit took umbrage with the fact that developers wishing to sell iOS apps were forced to fork over 30% of their profits to Apple.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, ruled today that the plaintiffs weren't in a legal position to bring the suit as they hadn't bought the applications at issue in the case. The complaint can still be amended and refiled, Gonzalez said.

The plaintiffs failed to prove "collective allegations that they have been deprived of lower cost alternatives, paid higher prices for Apple-approved applications, or had their iPhones disabled or destroyed," Gonzalez wrote. "At a minimum, plaintiffs must allege facts showing that each named plaintiff has personally suffered an injury-in-fact based on Apple's alleged conduct."

As one would expect, a lawyer for the plaintiffs indicated that refiling the case won't be a problem, noting that "we can add the extra detail very easily."